Innocent Bystanders

Unemployment predictions for May June 1, 2009

It’s that time again: the BLS will release the unemployment figures for May at the end of the week. But for those of you who are as impatient as I, we can jump the gun a bit and update the infamous unemployment chart with the projected value for May of 9.2%:

Looking at this chart, we can see three things:

The unemployment rate has started to flatten out a bit, as predicted

It may not break 10% (though there are predictions of 10.7% floating around)

The stimulus has still had absolutely no effect on the economy. That, of course, is no surprise

As has been pointed out before, the most striking thing about the chart is how poorly the actual unemployment rates were predicted. It is likely that Obama’s economists’ predictions were so far off the mark because of several factors:

Geithner’s early missteps spooked the market

The excessively large spending package(s) intimidated investors and business owners, who are worried about debt, inflation, and future tax increases.

Obama’s economists had no clue as to how slowly money percolates through the government.

Friday will bring the real numbers, but in April the predicted numbers were dead on, so I don’t expect to see much change.

UPDATE: The R&B Version of The Chart, Replete with Little Dots Instead of Big Triangles for the Math-Challenged Among You

As anybody who has ever actually plotted anything knows, the data point lies at the center of the marker. There is no apex – it’s an equilateral triangle, fer crissakes! I like pointy markers, and I like unfilled markers because they don’t clutter the plot as much. Hence, you’ll usually get diamonds or triangles from me as my first choice.

“Look, I already told you! I deal with the goddamn customers so the engineers don’t have to! I have people skills! I am good at dealing with people! Can’t you understand that? WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE!”

But honestly, I made the triangle ginormous just so they would stand out to anybody even glancing at the chart. If people are unhappy with the resolution and have an interest in the actual numbers, I’ll be happy to supply them (8.5%, 8.9%, 9.2%: there, I’m done) or plot it in an alternative form.

One of the limitations here is that I have to hand-place the points on Obama’s chart, to make it clear that these are in fact his team’s predictions with no modifications or funny business. I’d much rather replot them and then start plotting the actual curve. But I’d lose all the dramatic effect.

You’re such an abscissa-phile. Note that the apex of an isoceles triangle is independent of its orientation in space. Also note that the colloquial “down” really means “inward,” i.e., aligned with the force of the earth’s gravity. Which, since my screen is tilted at a delightfully ergonomic angle, does not make the graph and “down” aligned. Further, since your screen is undoubtedly tilted at a completely different angle, we cannot come to a common definition of “down” simply based on the pixels we observe.

Oh yeah? We know how to look stuff up. Try to find a definition of the “isoceles triangle” that Geoff mentioned. You can’t do it. He’s just makin’ this shit up as he goes along, hoping we will be intimidated.

we cannot come to a common definition of “down” simply based on the pixels we observe.

Well, OK, we need a gravity-based definition. So how about this: “Down is the direction that Geoff is gonna fall when Michael sucker-punches him in the belly, which is generally the same direction as the bottom of his graph.”

Reminds me of reading a zillion science fiction novels when I was a kid.

The way you go back in time and edit your comments reminds me even more of sci-fi.

I think I’m committed to giving away my sci-fi collection, BTW. My son doesn’t want to read any of the old stuff, and I never have time for it anymore. So I’m trying to think of a worthy recipient -probably should check with Mrs. Peel.

At my monthly village board meeting tonight, the chief of police advised us that he got us on the list for donated helmets for next years bike rodeo. Who’s the donor you ask? The biggest personal injury law firm in the area.

To this day, it bugs the fucking shit out of me that 99.9999% of the media do not know even something as simple as the difference between an average and a mean, much less the critical role of random sampling in making the latter meaningful. They say stupid shit all the time because of this.

An “average” is some numerical value which is obtained by dividing the actual values for an entire “population” by the size of the “population.”

So, for example, let’s say your population is men in the United States. You can google up the “fact” that the average age they marry is 27.7.

That’s not actually an average, because nobody really knows the age at which all U.S. males marry. They don’t even know the age of all U.S. males, which is the defined population. A school teacher can figure out averages for the grades given to 30 kids in her class, but you can’t do that with large populations.

The number is actually a mean, which means it is the average for a sample that supposedly represents the population.

Now, it ain’t guaranteed that the sample represents the population. That depends on two things that are easily done wrong:

(1) The sample size. (This really doesn’t have to be all that large if the population is very large, which is why Nielson does TV ratings based on a relatively small group of people.)

(2) The sample selection must be random!!!!! This is what easily gets fucked up all the time. The sample is skewed, so the results are bogus.

This, by the way, is why Democrats are always bitching about the Constitutional requirement that the census must be an “actual count,” which the SCOTUS has so far enforced. Democrats know that various lowlifes and scumbugs in shitty neighborhoods who are too stupid to fill out a census form, i.e., their natural constituents, are probably being undercounted.

So they want to introduce statistical sampling into the census process. Of course, once you do that, the census is endlessly going to be subject to political manipulation by controlling the sample, which controls the flow of federal largesse. That’s why one of Obama’s first moves was to put the Census Bureau under the control of the White House. He’s going to come up with a “statistically adjusted census” and have federal largesse distributed on that basis to his pals at ACORN.

Depends on the poem. Though I have to admit that arousal probably would not be my first reaction to a guy reciting poetry. Unless (a) the guy was Monty (who has a thing for Song of Solomon) or (b) it was really manly poetry, like The Charge of the Light Brigade or something.

Michael,
all I can say is do band geeks get Mrs Peel to have a death grip with her…..thighs……? Huh? come on?
.
.
.
Mrs Peel, true story.
I was flying down the road one day 130+
I passed something with long blond hair in a convertible.
.
.
It was like a magnet I had to look.
.
.
.
Unfortunately a helmet is streamlined for looking straight ahead.
.
.
Turned sideways?
.
.
I almost ripped my head off!

Cruisers are better than rice rockets, I mean if you put a girl on the back of a rr she is sitting up there all alone. with her thighs wrapped around your chest. But the view driving by is worth it. Cruisers otoh? much more fun.

Geithner’s early missteps spooked the market.
Yup. Especially his support of “restructuring” executive compensation.The excessively large spending package(s) intimidated investors and business owners, who are worried about debt, inflation, and future tax increases.
Maybe not so much the first one, since most inflationary costs just get passed on. But what you might see, as opposed to the self-feeding deflationary death spiral many businesses are in right now, is a self-feeding inflationary spike, where people are panic buying to avoid potential price increases. That is never good for a consumer, though a seller, if they play their cards right, can make a killing by factoring “replacement costs” into their pricing structure during a price spike.

But the taxes, especially the ones on businesses and their purchases/activities/investments/PPE/and depreciation scales, would be devastating, causing shockwaves that extend beyond that business, influencing suppliers and vendors.

And the interest rates on credit lines, as well as tighter rules, will discourage future investment and risk taking ventures. Again, not good.Obama’s economists had no clue as to how slowly money percolates through the government.
Triple Yup. Geithner worked at the World Bank, an institution so corrupt, inept, bloated, and inefficient, Third World DIctators tell them they need to loosen up a bit. And the rest of Geithner’s staff? Does he have one yet?

There’s no tach on my Royal Star Tour Classic, btw, which is OK because it was all about retro styling with leather bags and chrome, and a speedometer set on the tank. There is no instrumentation on the handlebars, just an aftermarket leather bag that Cathy bought for me.

But here’s my gripe.

With no tach, they put a governor on it to keep me from wrecking that low-RPM-torque four-cylinder water-cooled engine they were so proud of.

And the governor is set too low.

WTF? The point of no tach is that I, the driver, should know what is going on based upon the engine whine and a reasonable estimate of when stuff is going to start blowing up. Which I do. Give me a break. I don’t need no frickin’ governor.

This was actually the beginning of Obama’s nanny-state socialism, if you want my opinion.

The RS is a V4?
My Warrior is a V-twin. No limiter.
I dropped the big assed can, Upped the tire size and chipped it. 95 hp is not 155 (Vmax). With a little $ I could prolly hit 140+ Or I could buy a new Vmax with 210 hp.
Hahahahahah
Buwhahahaha! 200+ HP in a bike!!!!!!!!!!

Those ginormous red triangles may be distorting the view, but it appears to me that we are worse off now than the White House was predicting without the stimulush. So we’ve commited our eleventy snillion McDollars and got bupkus. Lesigh.

I’m embarrassed to admit I have had a couple of stats classes and I assumed Geoff was using the right point of the triangle to show the data point. The center of the triangle would look decidedly worse (meaning make your point even better) than what I was thinking. I think the “R & B” version would be more accurately understood by the great majority of those who have viewed your famous plotting.

There. Happy now? Farking whiny, can’t-find-the-center-of-an-equilateral-triangle weanies. It’s not like triangles aren’t used throughout the scientific and engineering literature and in PowerPoint presentations worldwide on a daily basis. But noooooooo. All of a sudden they’re a huge farking mystery.

I mean, really. If there were squares, which corner would you be trying to pick? If it was a circle, which part of the circumference would you be using? Why is a triangle so flipping confusing? Save for the sharp corners, it’s topologically identical to every other polygon, all the way up to the infinite-sided polygon (the circle).

So why does everybody want to treat it like an arrow instead of a data marker?

And I might not be as smart as Michael, but at least I know that the correct construction is “I very rarely think people are smarter than I.” There’s an implied “am” at the end of the sentence, and you wouldn’t say “me am,” would you?

Correct: “I know English grammar better than he [does].”
Incorrect: “I write more gooder than him.”

(Also correct: “I have more mosquito bites than you [do].” *scratches*)

There aren’t any bites inside my undies. There is one that would be inside them if I were a dude who wore boxers, but that one is mostly quiescent today, having been through a couple showers. It’s the two recently sustained ones, on one wrist and the opposite elbow, that are bugging me the most right now.

Oh, I killed a skeeter today that left a smear of blood on the wall. Mr. Clean’s Magic Eraser cleaned it right up. *makes mental note*

Luckily, she gave up on attempting to eat it and lost interest, whereupon I dropped a paper towel on it and dispatched it with a single stomp. I don’t know what that thing was, but it was huge. Must have been a good 2″ long.

Heck, those huge ass triangles get noticed when Geoff’s chart is posted on all the other blogs and stuff.

This is the first chart in my life where I’ve ever used huge markers, and it achieved exactly the response I wanted – everybody who even glanced at it knew exactly what the point was. My other charts, like, say, the latest at my site which shows that the NYT is a flat-out prevaricator, are more technically accurate, but they don’t get much attention. The subject and initial exposure are important, but so is the presentation.

Renowned grapher and chartsman geoff recently went on a shooting rampage though the dextrosphere, leaving a trail of math illiterates and dim wits in his path. When questioned by authorities, all he would say was, “3 farking data points!” over and over and over…

The giant triangles make it harder to see where your actual data point is.

Of course they do. But they make the rough location of the data points more obvious to the 95% of the readers who don’t care where the precise location is. And because I took the trouble to place them pretty doggone exactly, those who do care can figure it out.

…or plot it themselves, since I gave them the data points.

And I’m a math guy, so you can knock of insulting your readers.

Why would I ever do that? Especially if you’re a math guy? Or more especially if you’re just a sock puppet posing as a math guy? Or most especially if you’re just a sock puppet posing as a math guy who can’t find the center of an equilateral triangle?

Let this be a lesson to you children watching at home: See the bitterness, anger, and psychotic behaviours that protracted triangle denialism can engender. Don’t wait until it’s too late-if someone you love is “experimenting” with triangle data points seek professional help immediately (never approach a triangle wielding lunatic alone, they are to be considered armed, probably with a slide rule, and extremely dangerous).

It’s not an official WordPress widget. Just copy the HTML code they offer at the Flagcounter site and paste it into a text box on your sidebar. The FAQs at the site tell you how to edit the HTML to vary the display.

Whenever I see a picture of Charles Manson, I always think that there should be a law allowing us to incarcerate people on the basis of having crazy-eye.

Anyway, I have a question: WHAT THE HELL IS SO FREAKING SCARY ABOUT ME?!?

Last week, I was talking to a guy I was interested in. We don’t often get a chance to talk socially, so I took advantage of the opportunity, and as we talked, I realized that he was nervous and intimidated. This guy is a huge Marine. I am literally a 98-pound weakling, and several years his junior. (Needless to say, I’ve now lost interest. Nice work, genius. Try not being a pussy next time.)

Thinking back on it later, I realized that out of all the men in my general age range I’ve met, only one was not afraid of me, and all the guys I’ve dated have actually wanted to be metaphorically crushed beneath my stompy boots.

WTF? No seriously, WTFF? I have to be one of the least intimidating people on the face of the earth. I’m probably the most sensitive, most easily hurt person you will ever meet. I’m a huge wuss. And I go out of my way to be as soft and non-threatening as possible. Apparently, I don’t do a very good job at that, because people are intimidated by me.

Perhaps you don’t come across that way and people who don’t know you do not know how you really are?

Plus, the intelligence factor is something to consider. Intelligence is relative, meaning people have different skills and though someone may not be extremely “booksmart,” they can understand and fix machinery, etc. Your knowlege of physics and engineering may be intimidating.

Then there are the guys, as you said, that enjoy being dominated by a 98 pound, supersmart woman in leather boots.

Apparently, I don’t do a very good job at that, because people are intimidated by me.

Gelfling: it is not being scary that intimidates them, it is being attractive and desirable. Guys get nervous and intimidated when the stakes are high; when there’s a lot to lose. The more they’re attracted to you, the more there is to lose when they actually talk to you. Going out of your way to be “soft and non-threatening” probably just aggravates the problem.

All serriousness aside, lots of young men exhibit symptoms of nervousness around attractive girls, getting flooded with adrenaline does wacky things to people. Similar to public speaking anxiety, pulse goes up, perspiration, little shakes. Some of us shake it off by being goofy, others not so much. My opinion ain’t worth much, but I think a fella who shows a little of that is more interested than not.

The only man I’ve ever gotten nervous around is also the only man who isn’t intimidated by me…and, perhaps not coincidentally, a man to whom a tiny piece of my heart still belongs despite my best efforts to reclaim it. That makes me so damn mad because he’s never loved me and never will, and has not treated me anywhere near well enough to deserve such constancy. Dear Lord I hate myself so much for that. I keep thinking I’m over it and then it comes back with a vengeance. I haven’t even seen him for three years.

Anyway, I’ve dated plenty of guys who get nervous around me. It gets real old real fast. I’ve decided to hold out for a man who not only loves but understands me, and therefore loves me enough to not let me push him around.

Try acting helpless about something. If you come across as confident and in control of everything, there isn’t anything a man feels like he can bring to the table.

If you had confided in your Marine friend that you needed help with your marks-person-ship with your new pistol (even if you don’t), he would have had a problem to fix, a situation he could help with, a reason to interject himself into your life.

Dudes are like German Shepherds, you have to give us a job to do or we’ll just lay on the couch and get fat.

He was probably not being a pussy on purpose, most guys don’t whip out the testicles right away for fear of scarring off the quarry.

Man, I am having a really girly week. Screaming at a bug in the kitchen, coercing my dad into tearing up my closet for me, and now whining about men. Guess I ought to grow some (metaphorical) balls of my own and quit being such a wuss.

I’m more of a Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Someplace Way The Fuck Over There philosopher myself, but most guys are ready to assert themselves if the prize is won. Not sure what would make a fella want to get pushed around in the relationship Peelie, but I really don’t think thats the same dynamic at work with the jitters at the outset. Thats a high risk thing happening and does indicate genuine interest.

Sometimes I wonder how I didn’t walk out in front of a bus at those moments.

It’s all a part of the big game of who’s smarter than who. Some relationships thrive on a close battle of give and take, while others fall apart without a clearly superior combatant to take charge. Lots of guys are secretly looking to be an alpha in the latter, and very uncomfortable with the former (you could make the argument that we’re hard-wired that way). But at the same time, men are being emasculated and told that being “the man” in a relationship is dumb and wrong by the society at large. Basically guys don’t know what the fuck to do anymore. I count myself among them.

I’m reminded of a lady I know. She has a doctorate, she’s a college administrator, she’s always serving in a local political office and is in the middle of whatever’s going on. She can be a very intimidating person. She’s married to a blue collar guy. Work universes don’t overlap. When they’re together, she never seems to be pushing him around. She dotes on him. It seems a little unusual to me, but they seem to have figured it out. They’ve been married a long time.

Get a motorcycle Mrs Peel,
That will scare the crap out of all the girlie men. The ones that think it is hot and have the stones to approach you are a different kind of guy. (they may not be the kind of guy you are looking for, but they will not be wimps)

Or go fishing.

Different type of person (in my case not, but) you are much more likely to find a salt of the earth, hands on, self confident type there too. Not to mention it is a great opening to get a cute one to help you fillet your catch or something like that.

Do not have them bait your hook for you that is the stereotypical girl thing. (no double entaendries intended (crap I cannot spell engrish words let alone those frenchy ones!)

you say “um dude I am starting to develop a bad habit of jerking my trigger, can you give me some tips on how to squeeze it.” If he appears competent at the range then you move on to more financial considerations such as his ability and willingness to handload for you. Very critical that you progress quickly to this stage of a relationship in these days of limited factory ammo.

Well, we actually WERE talking about guns toward the end of the conversation. He was giving me suggestions on a carry weapon and told me about his collection. I thought about dropping a hint that I would be interested in seeing it, but didn’t because I couldn’t think of a subtle way to do that (and we do work together, you know). (Also, I wasn’t sure I could keep from referencing the “this is my rifle, this is my gun” ditty.) So it wouldn’t have been that hard for me to say I needed help with my marksmanship. He doesn’t know that (a) I don’t and (b) if I did, I would ask the former sniper I know.

So I never got to go to “How to Invite a Gentleman to the Shooting Range” class. I imagine it went a little like this:

*A Lady NEVER asks to see a Gentleman’s ‘Collection,’ lest she be misunderstood/ the subject of coarse jokes.

*A Lady ALWAYS watches the Gentleman shoot first, and takes the opportunity to compliment his aim or form.

*A Lady NEVER refused a Gentleman’s help with breathing and aim.

*A Lady may allow a Gentleman to encircle her with his arms briefly during the lesson, solely so that he may assist her with her grip. A Gentleman NEVER uses this occasion as an opportunity to make honk-honks with her chi-chis.

I believe that the skilled practioner could work his way much farther down the scale than that. Not that I would ever admit noticing, but I’m thinking that “honk-honk” is well within the realm of possibility.

[…] any case, here is the new number for May: 9.4%, which is 0.2% we had shown in the chart from a few days ago: Oh dear. And I’m serious – I expected the numbers to flatten out like it looked like […]

Because unemployment insurance records relate only to persons who have applied for such benefits, and because it is impractical to actually count every unemployed person each month, the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The CPS has been conducted in the United States every month since 1940 when it began as a Work Projects Administration program. It has been expanded and modified several times since then.

The plan is working folks, the majority of economists including the Fed Reserve, CBO, Zandi, (not Obama’s economists, that sounds like Coulter) were all low on their forecasts. The fact is, the Bush mess was worse and deeper than though and if it were not for Obama’s Recovery program, unemployment would be at 11% or higher.

Go find a job, do something worthwhile with your lives-you’re clearly too short term minded to make any sense with your half empty glass garbage.

[…] Their composite prediction was that unemployment would increase by 0.2% in June. Last month they predicted 0.4%, and we got 0.6%, but they were dead on with their April guess. We’ll see how they do this […]